1 / 30

HK Secondary Beam Issues

HK Secondary Beam Issues. Chris Densham STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory. T2K Operation History. Rep=3.52s 50kW [6 bunches]. 3.2s 3.04s 145kW. 2.56 s 190kW. 2.48 s  235kW. x10 19. x10 12. 6.63x10 20 pot until May.8,’13. 7 0. 120. 3.01x10 20 pot Jun.9, ’12. 6 0. 100.

tirzah
Télécharger la présentation

HK Secondary Beam Issues

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HK Secondary Beam Issues Chris Densham STFC Rutherford Appleton Laboratory

  2. T2K Operation History Rep=3.52s 50kW [6 bunches] 3.2s3.04s 145kW 2.56s 190kW 2.48s 235kW x1019 x1012 6.63x1020pot until May.8,’13 70 120 3.01x1020pot Jun.9,’12 60 100 1.43x1020pot until Mar.11,’11 50 Protons Per Pulse 80 40 Delivered # of Protons 60 Mar.8, 2012 30 40 20 20 10 Run-1 Run-2 Run-3 Run-4 0 0 Total # of pulses 1.2x107 7.7x106 2.2x106 4.7x106 Existing target & horns used from 2009.  1.2x107 pulses NuFact2013 @ IHEP, Beijing

  3. T2K Long Term Plan (~2018) Scenarios for Multi-MW output beam power are being discussed (unofficially and quietly!) : K. Hara, H. Harada, H. Hotchi, S. Igarashi, M. Ikegami, F. Naito, Y. Sato, M. Yamamoto, K.Tanaka, M. Tomizawa 1. Large aperture MR Enlarging the physical aperture from 81 to > 120 πmm.mrad - a new synchrotron in the MR tunnel 2. Second booster ring for the MR (emittance damping ring) BR with an extraction energy ~ 8 GeV, between the RCS and the MR 3. New proton linac for neutrino beam production Linacwith an beam energy > 9 GeV! MR operated only for SX users …

  4. One idea: 8 GeV Booster/Damping Ring

  5. T2K Secondary Beam-line Decay Volume Hadron absorber Target station Muon Monitor 110m Target station (shielding, hadron absorber) designed & constructed for 3-4 MW beam power Beam window

  6. T2K Secondary Beam-line Helium Vessel Concrete Blocks Iron shield (2.2m) BEAM 2nd horn 3rd horn Decay Volume Hadron absorber Target station Muon Monitor Most components in secondary beamline would need to be upgraded for MW operation: beam window, target, horns - NB activated air & water handling Beam window

  7. T2K Secondary Beam-line Helium Vessel Concrete Blocks Iron shield (2.2m) BEAM 2nd horn 3rd horn Decay Volume Hadron absorber Target station Muon Monitor Beam window Baffle Target 1st horn

  8. T2K Target & horn • Helium cooled graphite rod • Design beam power: 750 kW (heat load in target c.25 kW) • Beam power so far: 230 kW • 1st target & horn currently being replaced after 4 years operation, 7e20 p.o.t. π p π 400 m/s Target exchange system Helium flow lines

  9. Secondary beam component limitations for >1MW operation • Beam windows (target station and target) • Radiation damage & embrittlement of Ti6Al4V alloy • Stress waves from bunch structure • Is beryllium a better candidate? • Target • Radiation damage of graphite • Reduction in thermal conductivity, swelling etc • Structural integrity & dimensional stability • Heat transfer • High helium volumetric flow rate (and high pressure or high pressure drops) • 1stHorn • OTR, beam monitors • Target station emission limitations

  10. Horn Problems/Limitations (T.Sekiguchi) • What are real problems for horns in a high power beam? • One tends to consider about these things for a high power beam. • Cooling to survive a large heat deposit. • Mechanical strength for a high current (~300kA) • Fatigue due to a repetitive stress of O(108). • These issues are actually major consideration, but… • Real problems in a high power beam do happen due to • Radio-activation: • A treatment of radioactive waste (tritium and 7Be, etc). • No more manual maintenance  Remote maintenance needed. • Hydrogen production by a water radiolysis. • NOx production in case of air environment. • Acidification of water. NuFact2013 @ IHEP, Beijing

  11. Horn issues for >1MW beam (T.Sekiguchi) • T2K horn is designed for 750kW beam. • Currently hydrogen production and poor stripline cooling limit an acceptable beam power. • However, some modifications are made for new horns to resolve these problems. • In order to achieve 750kW beam power, replacing with new horns and new power supplies are necessary. • New horns will be replaced in FY2013 and new power supplies will be operated from fall 2014. • Update – new 3rd horn successfully installed, 2nd & 1st horns to be replaced in January 2014 • Possibility for beam power beyond 1MW is considered. An acceptable beam power for horn is estimated to be 1.85MW. NuFact2013 @ IHEP, Beijing

  12. New 3rd horn being installed last month

  13. Limitations of target technologies Flowing or rotating targets Segmented Peripherally cooled monolith

  14. ‘Divide and Rule’ for increased power Dividing material is favoured since: • Better heat transfer • Lower static thermal stresses • Lower dynamic stresses from intense beam pulses Helium cooling is favoured (cf water) since: • No ‘water hammer’ or cavitation effects from pulsed beams • Lower coolant activation, no radiolysis • Negligible pion absorption – coolant can be within beam footprint • For graphite, higher temperatures partially anneal radiation damage Low-Z target concepts preferred (static, easier)

  15. Pressurised helium cooled beryllium sphere concept for 2 MW, 120 GeV Heat transfer coefficient

  16. CERN SPL Superbeam study • 4 MW beam power at 4.5 GeV • 4 targets in 4 horns considered feasible • ~50 kW heat load per target • Particle bed only viable static target option • Concept recycled for ESS SB proposal, candidate for HK

  17. Particle bed advantages ... and challenges • High pressure drops, particularly for long thin Superbeamtarget geometry • Need to limit gas pressure for beam windows • Transverse flow reduces pressure drops – but • Difficult to get uniform temperatures and dimensional stability of container Large surface area for heat transfer Coolant can pass close to maximum energy deposition High heat transfer coefficients Low quasi static thermal stress Low dynamic stress (for oscillation period <<beam spill time)

  18. Particle Bed Target Concept Solution Packed bed cannister in symmetrical transverse flow configuration Titanium alloy cannister containing packed bed of titanium alloy spheres Cannister perforated with elipitical holes graded in size along length Model Parameters Proton Beam Energy = 4.5GeV Beam sigma = 4mm Packed Bed radius = 12mm Packed Bed Length = 780mm Packed Bed sphere diameter = 3mm Packed Bed sphere material : Titanium Alloy Coolant = Helium at 10 bar pressure T.Davenne

  19. Packed Bed Model (FLUKA + CFX v13) Streamlines in packed bed Packed bed modelled as a porous domain Permeability and loss coefficients calculated from Ergun equation (dependant on sphere size) Overall heat transfer coefficient accounts for sphere size, material thermal conductivity and forced convection with helium Interfacial surface area depends on sphere size Acts as a natural diffuser - flow spreads through target easily 100 m/s Velocity vectors showing inlet and outlet channels and entry and exit from packed bed

  20. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust...The ultimate destiny for all graphite targets(T2K c.1021p/cm2 so far) LAMPF fluence 10^22 p/cm2 BNL tests (in water): fluence ~10^21 p/cm2 PSI fluence 10^22 p/cm2

  21. Interaction of protonbeams with metals

  22. Collaboration on accelerator target materials as part of Proton Accelerators for Science & Innovation (PASI) initiative. http://www-radiate.fnal.gov/index.html Key objectives: Introduce materials scientists with expertise in radiation damage to accelerator targets community Apply expertise to target and beam window issues Co-ordinate in-beam experiments and post-irradiation examination MoUsigned by 5 US/UK institutes – Fermilab, BNL, PNNL, RAL, OxfordMaterials Department New Post-doc recruited at Oxford to study beryllium Working groups on graphite, beryllium, tungsten, new collaboration on Ti alloys

  23. 4mm 3mm 10mm 3mm 1um Micro-mechanical testing • Unique materials expertise at Oxford (MFFP Group) • Micro-cantilevers machined by Focused Ion Beams • Compression tests • Tension tests • Three Point Bend • Cantilever bending • New facility NNUF (National Nuclear User Facility) under construction at Culham to carry out such testing of small quantities highly active materials

  24. Secondary beam component limitations for >1MW operation • Beam windows (target station and target) • Radiation damage & embrittlement of Ti6Al4V alloy • Stress waves from bunch structure • Is beryllium a better candidate? • Target • Radiation damage of graphite • Reduction in thermal conductivity, swelling etc • Try beryllium? • Structural integrity & dimensional stability • Heat transfer • High helium volumetric flow rate (and high pressure or high pressure drops) • 1st Horn • Target station emission limitations

  25. Beam Programme Topics • Collaboration between experts regarding: • Physics performance • Engineering performance • Materials performance • Engineering studies • Materials – Radiation damage studies • DPA/He/H2 calculations • Cross-referencing with literature data • Devise suitable experiments with irradiation and Post Irradiation Examination (PIE) • Prototyping • Heating/cooling tests

  26. 1. Beam Windows • Ti6Al4V and Ti6Al4V1B • Ti6Al4V used in T2K beam windows for resilience to pulsed beams • MSU/FRIB intend to use Ti alloy for beam dump window, will see very high radiation damage rates • Collaboration between RAL, KEK, Fermilab and MSU via RaDIATE/PASI collaboration to perform: • Neutron damage experiments • Heavy ion damage experiments at MSU • Investigation of relevance to T2K beam parameters, possibility to test sample from used T2K beam windows? • Beryllium: • Attractive as low-Z, high strength, high thermal conductivity • Report nearly complete on radiation damage literature (by Oxford MFFP Group/NNL) • Post-doc recruited at Oxford to start Jan 2014 (formerly at PSI with Yong Dai) • In-beam experiment scheduled for HiRadMat facility at CERN

  27. 2. Study limits of existing target • How far can existing T2K design be pushed? • Design developments may push current design towards 1 MW operation • But for how long? Graphite radiation damage issues • Exploit strand of RaDIATE collaboration – e.g. of interest to Fermilab for NOvA target • Thermal-hydraulic/CFD simulations: • Higher pressure helium -> higher power operation • But: extra stresses in window (from pressure and thermal stresses) and target material (thermal stresses)

  28. 3. Target research • Study static, packed bed, low-Z targets • Beryllium, AlBeMetalloys, titanium alloys are only realistic long lifetime alternatives to graphite • Conceptual design, engineering simulations • Physics vsengineering performance (high pion yield, long enough lifetime) • Manufacturing prototyping • Off-line heating & cooling experiments involving: • Induction heater • Prototype helium cooling plant • Calorimetric measurements • On-line pulsed beam experiment at HiRadMat, CERN

  29. 2012 HiRadMat pulsed beam experiment with tungsten powder Lift height roughly correlates with deposited energy Shot #8, 1.75e11 protonsNote: nice uniform lift Shot #9, 1.85e11 protonsNote: filaments! Trough photographed after the experiment.Note: powder disruption

More Related